Dropped kerb planning rejected due to RPA

[Gajendra]

1 minute ago, richyrich said:

I thought any new access needed to go through planning?? In which case 'lines of sight' may be more of an issue than affecting tree roots. 

Contact the council again for confirmation.

If necessary put your application in. Wait months- find out all reasons for refusal/approval. Get expert in and appeal.. Might take a while...

I think planning is not needed but I do need to get approval from highway I think. Here is a email that I received.

 

Quote

An inspection has recently taken place and the application assessed against the Vehicle
Crossover Policy. I regret to inform you that your application has been unsuccessful for
the following reasons:
As per to minimum standard of section 2f of the current policy.
f) Trees – Highway trees will not be removed to allow a vehicle crossover. If there
is conflict with an established street tree on the public highway, a vehicle crossing
cannot be constructed within the root protection area (RPA) of the tree in accordance
with British Standards (currently BS 5837:2012). As a guide, for a tree with a single
stem, the RPA is calculated as 12 times the stem diameter, measured at a height
of 1.5m above the ground level.
.
Please note I did measure the trees RPA,
Left side tree RPA 12 x 0.7 = 8.4m
Right side tree RPA 12 x 0.33 =3.96m
The trees RPA over laps one another . I do recognize that there may be crossovers
down your road that are close to the trees but these would have been constructed
before the current vehicle crossover policy was put in place.

 

[richyrich]

2 minutes ago, Gajendra said:

I think planning is not needed but I do need to get approval from highway I think. Here is a email that I received.

 

 

I'm not familiar with urban planning. I'm in rural area. Neighbour had an application refused. With planning applications you can appeal- but since this is not a normal application that follows the usual planning process then it appears there is no obvious means to appeal. Ombudsmen waste of time. I think in this instance you need a qualified town planning consultant or legal expert..👍

[john87]

The "policy" they mention.. Does this have any basis in law??? What i mean is, a council could not for instance insist that people could only cut down trees with a Husqvarna saw, as this would clearly have no basis in law.. Upon which laws would he council seek to rely?? [out of interest]

 

john..

[tree77]

With our local authority you only need a planning application if its a classified road, otherwise is just a vehicle cross over application.

[richyrich]

12 minutes ago, tree77 said:

With our local authority you only need a planning application if its a classified road, otherwise is just a vehicle cross over application.

You are correct- i was unaware of this.

[daltontrees]

10 hours ago, Gajendra said:

Thanks Juels. I am willing to pay a reasonable amount to carry out the survey to see if there are any roots where I want to build a dropped kerb. But the email I received was sent from council highway department to say my plan has been rejected and email their complaint team if I am not happy. It is crazy who on this planet will be happy with their plan being rejected haha. They have not said anything on what are my options. 

 

Apparently there is a new legislation where you have to build a soakaway in your drive plus you have to build your drive before council builds the dropped kerb. On this street there are 91 houses and 89 of them have dropped kerb which is why I am a little annoyed. 

I can certainly see why you are put out, and it also sounds like I am saying 89 wrongs don't make a right. The Council seems to have decided to prevent damage to street trees with its new policy. Who knows, they may have witnessed over the years the deterioration or loss of trees in your area because of root damage.

My comments were more just a general observation of Arbtalkers typically assuming everything every council everywhere does is irrational, corrupt, inept, inconsistent etc. I represent a mix of public and private sector clients and often I point out that trees don't know the difference. The prvate sector screws up almost as often as the public sector, but we never get to hear of that. You can go on a crusade or self-righteous indignation and force a Council to provide information and you can appeal against its decisions, but a private sector body will just tell you to go away and mind you own business.

Anyway, all other things being equal your crossover prospects seem to be dependent on one thing, the existence or not of important roots and rooting volume in the wedge of stuff that would inevitably have to be removed. Everything else can be overcome by engineering solutions. Proof could be tricky, expensive and inconclusive, only you can decide if it's worth trying.

Edited December 16, 2021 by daltontrees

[daltontrees]

14 hours ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Isn’t there a thing whereby they are trying to stop people turning their front gardens into drives everywhere?

Cos it ruins the look of neighborhoods and causes more flooding cos of hard standing.

You have to admit that the front of the house with a nice garden looks a lot better than two parked cars up to the front door.

 

Maybe the council are trying to draw a line under this sort of thing.

Yes I think this started in London where it was shown that surfaced front gardens were causing rainwater discharge straignt into drains, causing storm surges and contributing to the depletion of water in aquifers which ultimately are a part of the drinking water supply. A natural front garden will  absorb a lot of rain, which percolates slowly to aquifers or is stored until evapotranspirated or at the very worst reaches water courses and drains after a delay of days, spreading the discharge patterns after rain events.

I don't know if policies are aimed at the aesthetics of the area. In  my view they should be because it nearly always looks shit. Plus if you put spaces in the front of a garden that didn't have  a driveway before, you are basically claiming the road forntage as your own whereas previously it would have been available first-come-first-served for parking.

[openspaceman]

32 minutes ago, daltontrees said:

Plus if you put spaces in the front of a garden that didn't have  a driveway before, you are basically claiming the road forntage as your own whereas previously it would have been available first-come-first-served for parking.

This is true plus you may park across your own dropped kerb and still deny this to others

[Paul in the woods]

12 hours ago, Gajendra said:

Apparently there is a new legislation where you have to build a soakaway in your drive plus you have to build your drive before council builds the dropped kerb. On this street there are 91 houses and 89 of them have dropped kerb which is why I am a little annoyed. 

Unless it's changed recently that will depend on what surface you're using. Plenty of permiable solutions available that don't need planning.

 

https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200130/common_projects/45/paving_your_front_garden

 

As for your problem, I assume you're in the LEZ, I doubt it will be any help at all but another reason for dropping the kerb is so you can charge an EV.

 

Looking at the photo, I assume you down own the property bordering the road at the far right of the photo?

Edited December 16, 2021 by Paul in the woods

[JaySmith]

Love how it turns into a bit of TO bashing! Just like in all things in life there are good ones and bad ones, like climbers good ones and bad ones! There are many good TO's out there who are realists who have spent years climbing trees and apply that knowledge to decision making. There are also some who have read everything in a book and very much computer says no. Just my observations.

 

Obviously I haven't see your site but with the proximity of the trees and the RPA's its hard to see how you could install a crossover there as you need to dig down rathe than build up. Things like Cellweb are great when you can build up but not really applicable in this case. You will have to follow process, i.e. put the application in, have it refused and then go through the complaints procedure. At which point you may then be able to put your case forward for exploring things such as root radar etc. For me if a resident came to me and wanted to explore this kind of thing (at their cost) I think I would be obliged to listen.